no title

Use funds for alternative transportation

Letters Policy

The Dispatch welcomes letters to the editor from readers. Typed letters of 200 words or
fewer are preferred; all might be edited. Each letter must include name, home address and daytime
phone number.
Dispatch.com also posts letters that don't make it to print in
The Dispatch.

FAX

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch

Already a subscriber?
Enroll in EZPay and get a free gift!
Enroll now.

Sunday June 24, 2012 3:17 AM

I respond to the Monday
Dispatch article “ODOT: Spend the $$$,” on the Ohio Department of Transportation urging metropolitan planning organizations to spend more of their federal funding rather than saving it.

It’s hard to believe, with all the room for improvement in our transportation system, specifically regarding its lack of options, that the planning organizations would stockpile federal money that could be used to improve the system.

Although these funds might be trivial for major road and highway projects that have huge price tags, they would have a substantial effect on alternative-infrastructure projects, such as public transit, dedicated bikeways and better sidewalks.

One benefit of this federal money is that it can be “flexed” for these alternative-infrastructure projects and isn’t limited to just highway and road projects. But ODOT and the metropolitan planning groups are not taking advantage of the ability to flex this federal funding. Much of it still goes to traditional highway and road projects, which generally provide inferior returns on investment, support less job growth, contribute to greater fuel consumption and emissions and do little to relieve congestion, when compared with alternative-infrastructure projects.

It’s good to see ODOT pushing the planning organizations to fully utilize their surplus funds, but these funds should be directed to multimodal and alternative-infrastructure projects that will expand transportation choice, not traditional road and highway projects.